[strutter] I'd be surprised if he could fit it in, what with being an Association football journalist (as he must be by now) and training for the cycling events at the Olympics? [/strutter]
Without discussing anything on specific or identifiable terms, and speaking in generalities...
A lot of things are opaque. I don't know if you have answers.
(1) Is there, in your view, a difference really between magic and silver circle firms, and certain chasing pack firms in the way they do things. In the way they compensation before equity. Getting to equity. Are particular firms easier than others.
(2) I see senior associates at 11-13PQE, and I'm like mate. Come on. Is that the reasonable wait time nowadays? Are some areas just harder than others. Are their "partner" positions going in UK firms which are not equity but pay like equity on a bespoke agreement? Do they do these internally?
(3) Personally - just speaking for me - I would be horrified to go work at, by way of general example, BLP or whatever it calls itself nowadays. People / colleagues / friends in the profession WOULD judge me for it. 100%. Half the pay, still working the hours. What happened to him/she/it. Speaking of BLP, it really declined after it merged with BC...so many firms are doing that these days, it's worrying.
Both Laz and Mutters have provided me with invaluable examples of approach to career.
Mutters once said something to someone here about the risk of staying in a bad job as much as going. I took that to heart and it has had a transformative impact on my ability to deal with difficult situations at work.
Laz's refusal to engage with notions of a linear career progression have reminded me that there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I'm bored with this shit. Next". If I was still doing what everyone else thought was sensible, I'd be the most* depressed trapped-feeling senior associate in the City, wasting my life throwing good energy after bad.
*And that statement is made in full cognisance of the competition for that title.
"It is a CV that reads well. If you can articulate the reasons for change then thats asset not liability as change = experience."
Yes. It can be an asset rather than hinderance generally if you can craft a narrative with creative storytelling. It's a much more interesting narrative than Jim Jones who worked for A&O for x years never moving.
Hey I thought I'd get better experience with this opportunity, and x things were narrowing/pigeonholding me at y shop - then you look, correctly, as looking out for your own career, and you're also able to talk about what you were doing without them having to do an examination in chief. You get a lot of it out of the way in the intro.
When you get to partner level and there's a mutual understanding the firm is just a brand platform for your work, people just want to know your book of business and BD plan above everything and a lot of the associate moving on questions aren't quite as important
Reasons for moving should look at least slightly obvious. Laz's just reads bouncy particularly with all the sabbaticals but hey he still gets work despite this.
Mutters once said something to someone here about the risk of staying in a bad job as much as going. I took that to heart and it has had a transformative impact on my ability to deal with difficult situations at work.
"This is entirely common in firms where most partners stay for 20-30 years.
Not really a thing at US firms where average partnership must be, what, 4-6 years?"
I don't know about that, seems ridiculous and uncommon and only for advisory practice areas. Imagine you're at Lovells - which I guess pays about £130k to a 5PQE. I don't know what happens to salaries above 7/8th years, and I hear it bottoms out above 5/6 in UK firms.
I've heard horror stories of counsel / salaried partners getting 200k (or lower!) at Travers, Macs, Lovells, BCLP, those sorts. I don't believe it to be true, but the stories circulate.
And people can stay at salaried partner for 3-8 years before equity. So a 20 PQE gets finally properly made up to the bottom of the equity. By that time you're nearly 50 son.
"I don't know what happens to salaries above 7/8th years, and I hear it bottoms out above 5/6 in UK firms"
As someone who had a hand in setting salaries at previous shop I can assure you this isn't true
Although tbf we did it more on performance at senior non partner level - so top performers got 15% pay rise and 40% bonus whereas the plodders got a few % for both.
Reasons for moving should look at least slightly obvious. Laz's just reads bouncy particularly with all the sabbaticals but hey he still gets work despite this.
Laz's CV is bouncy; it doesn't just read bouncy. But consider this. Nowadays a whole generation want plural careers, less expectation of commitment, variety and change. They want to do a shift then leave, travel, discover themselves, become yoga teachers or wellness gurus. Inevitably this makes for a CV that has periods of commitment and sweating of the old assets, but then new roles, geographies, professions, then gaps then the whole thing again. Could it be, COULD IT REALLY BE ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that Laz was just before his time, a trailblazer, a maker of trends, a zeitgeist harvester and pioneer? Could our years of criticism and pisstake of his constant self-reflection and reinvention, aspiration and ennui simply be mistaken? Could it be that we are the ones with the problems, because we are stuck in our ways and enslaved? Perhaps he has forged a permissive path for the generation below. Yes, he is an enabler. Yes, we are the trapped ones. We need to be more Laz. BE MORE LAZ.
No, I’m not a director, but in case your next response had the answer been “yes” was going to be “what does your employer think about that”, the answer is that (as you well know) there is no prohibition on solicitors being directors of companies.
Don't get me wrong, I quite admire Laz for his piss artistry with his career even if he hasn't got to the level he should have because of it but the generation Muttley is on about aren't yet handing out jobs. Not as partners in law firms anyway.
0
0
[strutter] I'd be surprised if he could fit it in, what with being an Association football journalist (as he must be by now) and training for the cycling events at the Olympics? [/strutter]
0
0
His FIL hasn't decided what he will fund next, I heard.
0
0
u may check my linkedin m99
0
0
The startup was going well, until he took the coding team to a strip club.
0
0
Oh Laz you have returned to law again. What happened.
1
0
I don’t know if you are aware m77, but you can get paid quite decent money for providing legal advice.
0
0
Well done m7
youll boss that
0
0
Sixth time lucky dude.
2
0
Heh
Chambo old sun, if there’s one thing the world doesn’t care about, it’s how many law firms you worked for betore
see y on the dolla side
0
0
It is a CV that reads well. If you can articulate the reasons for change then thats asset not liability as change = experience.
0
0
Without discussing anything on specific or identifiable terms, and speaking in generalities...
A lot of things are opaque. I don't know if you have answers.
(1) Is there, in your view, a difference really between magic and silver circle firms, and certain chasing pack firms in the way they do things. In the way they compensation before equity. Getting to equity. Are particular firms easier than others.
(2) I see senior associates at 11-13PQE, and I'm like mate. Come on. Is that the reasonable wait time nowadays? Are some areas just harder than others. Are their "partner" positions going in UK firms which are not equity but pay like equity on a bespoke agreement? Do they do these internally?
(3) Personally - just speaking for me - I would be horrified to go work at, by way of general example, BLP or whatever it calls itself nowadays. People / colleagues / friends in the profession WOULD judge me for it. 100%. Half the pay, still working the hours. What happened to him/she/it. Speaking of BLP, it really declined after it merged with BC...so many firms are doing that these days, it's worrying.
1
0
Both Laz and Mutters have provided me with invaluable examples of approach to career.
Mutters once said something to someone here about the risk of staying in a bad job as much as going. I took that to heart and it has had a transformative impact on my ability to deal with difficult situations at work.
Laz's refusal to engage with notions of a linear career progression have reminded me that there's absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I'm bored with this shit. Next". If I was still doing what everyone else thought was sensible, I'd be the most* depressed trapped-feeling senior associate in the City, wasting my life throwing good energy after bad.
*And that statement is made in full cognisance of the competition for that title.
0
0
Good luck with it Laz
0
0
"It is a CV that reads well. If you can articulate the reasons for change then thats asset not liability as change = experience."
Yes. It can be an asset rather than hinderance generally if you can craft a narrative with creative storytelling. It's a much more interesting narrative than Jim Jones who worked for A&O for x years never moving.
Hey I thought I'd get better experience with this opportunity, and x things were narrowing/pigeonholding me at y shop - then you look, correctly, as looking out for your own career, and you're also able to talk about what you were doing without them having to do an examination in chief. You get a lot of it out of the way in the intro.
When you get to partner level and there's a mutual understanding the firm is just a brand platform for your work, people just want to know your book of business and BD plan above everything and a lot of the associate moving on questions aren't quite as important
0
0
Reasons for moving should look at least slightly obvious. Laz's just reads bouncy particularly with all the sabbaticals but hey he still gets work despite this.
1
0
Mutters once said something to someone here about the risk of staying in a bad job as much as going. I took that to heart and it has had a transformative impact on my ability to deal with difficult situations at work.
good to read that
0
0
"I see senior associates at 11-13PQE, and I'm like mate. Come on. Is that the reasonable wait time nowadays?"
This is entirely common in firms where most partners stay for 20-30 years.
Not really a thing at US firms where average partnership must be, what, 4-6 years?
0
0
Just remind me what name I should be looking at on LinkedIn?
0
0
"This is entirely common in firms where most partners stay for 20-30 years.
Not really a thing at US firms where average partnership must be, what, 4-6 years?"
I don't know about that, seems ridiculous and uncommon and only for advisory practice areas. Imagine you're at Lovells - which I guess pays about £130k to a 5PQE. I don't know what happens to salaries above 7/8th years, and I hear it bottoms out above 5/6 in UK firms.
I've heard horror stories of counsel / salaried partners getting 200k (or lower!) at Travers, Macs, Lovells, BCLP, those sorts. I don't believe it to be true, but the stories circulate.
And people can stay at salaried partner for 3-8 years before equity. So a 20 PQE gets finally properly made up to the bottom of the equity. By that time you're nearly 50 son.
0
0
Laz m8, only very recently you said you were finally done with law, and would never ever return, what happened? Good luck anyway
0
0
"I don't know what happens to salaries above 7/8th years, and I hear it bottoms out above 5/6 in UK firms"
As someone who had a hand in setting salaries at previous shop I can assure you this isn't true
Although tbf we did it more on performance at senior non partner level - so top performers got 15% pay rise and 40% bonus whereas the plodders got a few % for both.
2
0
0
0
failed in london25 May 22 20:39
Reply |
Report
Reasons for moving should look at least slightly obvious. Laz's just reads bouncy particularly with all the sabbaticals but hey he still gets work despite this.
Laz's CV is bouncy; it doesn't just read bouncy. But consider this. Nowadays a whole generation want plural careers, less expectation of commitment, variety and change. They want to do a shift then leave, travel, discover themselves, become yoga teachers or wellness gurus. Inevitably this makes for a CV that has periods of commitment and sweating of the old assets, but then new roles, geographies, professions, then gaps then the whole thing again. Could it be, COULD IT REALLY BE ladies and gentlemen of the jury, that Laz was just before his time, a trailblazer, a maker of trends, a zeitgeist harvester and pioneer? Could our years of criticism and pisstake of his constant self-reflection and reinvention, aspiration and ennui simply be mistaken? Could it be that we are the ones with the problems, because we are stuck in our ways and enslaved? Perhaps he has forged a permissive path for the generation below. Yes, he is an enabler. Yes, we are the trapped ones. We need to be more Laz. BE MORE LAZ.
1
0
Certainly a legend.
id instruct him just because he’s a legend if I ever needed to do a deal which was in his zone.
1
0
whatever that zone happened to be on the relevant day, obviously
0
0
I was talking about a transaction involving blockchain-crypto-smart contract-AI-garden landscaping-soccer journalism-politics, FAOD
0
0
Heh
0
0
what muttley said tbh
0
0
You definitely hacked his account.
0
0
So what did happen to the 50 employees of LazCorp?
I trust that you made sure none of them was out of pocket as a result of that short lived experience?
0
0
Lazcorp continues in business
0
0
Really? And you're still a director?
0
0
No, I’m not a director, but in case your next response had the answer been “yes” was going to be “what does your employer think about that”, the answer is that (as you well know) there is no prohibition on solicitors being directors of companies.
0
0
So if you aren't a director who runs it?
0
0
my people
0
0
so you're a shadow director?
0
0
no, I am a shareholder, the 98% shareholder in fact
but it’s not illegal to be a shadow director; so what if I were?
0
0
I know it isn't.
Just slightly, erm....unusual. Raises a few questions.
0
0
Don't get me wrong, I quite admire Laz for his piss artistry with his career even if he hasn't got to the level he should have because of it but the generation Muttley is on about aren't yet handing out jobs. Not as partners in law firms anyway.
0
0
“he hasn't got to the level he should have because of it”
there’s time yet m99
2
0
0
0
Congratulations on the new job Laz. Decent firm imo. Hope it goes well.
0
0
Clearly Laz was very personable with the receptionist on interview.
0
0
Good luck with the new role!
Join the discussion